Christopher Castillo Arrested After Threatening To Kill Obama On Facebook

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You're not going to get rid of the EC because the less populous states don't want to become slaves to the desires of the more populous. That's why the system we have was put in place: it's a check on the power of the populous states, balancing it with a bit of extra power awarded to the small.

That and the founders were terrified that a populist ideologue would destroy the country by riding to power on the popular vote... not the intention at all of the founders... who did include the electors in the constitution but not the electoral college.

Everyone can be great, because everyone can serve.~ Martin Luther King, Jr.

That and the founders were terrified that a populist ideologue would destroy the country by riding to power on the popular vote... not the intention at all of the founders... who did include the electors in the constitution but not the electoral college.

Since the electors are supposed to gather, they did include the electoral college, which at root means "gathering of electors".

"Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

As others have said, one needs to cite where they got it from and put it in a quote tag... even if it was just from an email. And it's easy to say the system is screwed up, but failing to provide a viable alternative isn't helping your case.

Doesn't take long, either; I've often start a post with "A friend sent me this in an email"....

then Opinterph butts in and posts the actual source on the web.

"Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

I think it's a big flaw that the president in the US doesn't always have majority of congress behind him.

In most countries the system is built so the head of the government (usually prime minister) doesn't get in office unless he has the parliament behind him.

When you have different people behind the presidency and the congress you can get stuck in political arguments and not be able to move forward on cases where change is needed. The whole tax changes now in the US is a good example.

He's pretty good at that... I wonder if he has the software that some professors have in detecting plagiarism... it's basically why some of my professors (esp in grad school) wanted big papers via email or on disk instead of hard copy. Or he could just be putting portions into google search... I dunno lol.

Any thoughts on Germany's system? It puts more emphasis on political parties... it's a pretty efficient system they have. The interesting thing is Merkel is personally popular, but her political parties aren't... so her government could fall if they lose a majority in the next election.

I decided some time ago that representation in the House should be proportional within each state delegation; beyond that I'd leave things alone.

"Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

Similar to this story...I think it was NPR or FOX radio that reported a story about a 26yr Police Veteran in jacksonville, Florida claiming he'd Kill Obama if someone hired/asked him to....The idiot sadi it at some Cop-meeting and got busted....

He's not being charged for threatening the President in public...He was planning on retiring early so the Force is letting him walk sooner than later....Officers stick together...

^
Cops are developing the clannishness that gave us the Hatfields and McCoys, where right and wrong don't matter, you just close ranks. It's a form of corruption that lends itself to an easy flip to a police state.

"Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

I think it's a big flaw that the president in the US doesn't always have majority of congress behind him.

In most countries the system is built so the head of the government (usually prime minister) doesn't get in office unless he has the parliament behind him.

When you have different people behind the presidency and the congress you can get stuck in political arguments and not be able to move forward on cases where change is needed. The whole tax changes now in the US is a good example.

And that's the best part. Giving the president the power to do whatever he wants, whenever he wants, is a bad thing. I'm thankful for having a congress that can tell the president to go pound sand. Yes, sometimes things don't get accomplished, but that's not always a bad thing. I'd rather have them bickering back and forth than just passing through every stupid idea that every president comes up with. The huge mess that is Obamacare, is a good example of what happens when a congress just backs the president.

Oh, and there's no point in defending your party. The politicians that you elect, don't give a damn about you personally. They care about saying what they have to say to get elected. Obama likes gay people? Pshhh, yeah right!

Democrats are just as bad as republicans. They threaten each other with death all the time. The death threats on Obama are brought up so often, why? Because of his race? Yeah, probably. It's the only logical reason considering every president in the history of the US has had many, many, threats made on their lives. And some even paid for it with it, but why is it such a big deal with this president?.....

Man, I love being an independent! Sitting back watching everybody defend somebody based on a party affiliation(aka nothing). People should vote for a president based on how he will be for the country. Remember the 1980 and 84 elections? When people crossed the party lines to vote for someone that they thought was best for the country. Winner takes 49 states, 525 of the 538 EC votes, and 58.8% of the pop vote. That's how it should be. Unfortunately, I doubt something like that will ever happen again. With all the people now that just will not vote for someone because they have a R next to their name and vice versa. Sad, really.

Obama care is a huge mess? Since when? A republican actually implemented it before Obama was even President by the way... he ran for President and lied about his record. And Obamacare is not a mess at all... it's a small, if inadequate step in the right direction. Getting people health care who need it the most. It's not a perfect solution however.

I'm not going to get involved in a back-and-forth about Obamacare. I will say I don't like how it passed through Congress, and the issues with the SCOTUS afterwards. I don't care what party was involved with it, and I'm not saying it's bad because Democrats had something to do with it. And people will/do disagree with me about it.

Originally Posted by GiancarloC

Psshhh... why don't you prove he doesn't? He seems to be genuine enough.

He seems to be genuine enough because he wanted to be president. It's not just him, it's most politicians saying what they must to be elected. Just search for the issue before he became president, or before he was running for the office.

Originally Posted by GiancarloC

Utter nonsense. Some democrats should shut up from time to time, but the republicans are going to completely new lows. And show me where Democrats threaten the other side with death.

This statement I made was more for the topic of the thread, and some responses stating that it's the Republicans that are evil, and make the death threats(not a quote). This had nothing to do with issues, or even their bickering. And for the death threats, I wasn't referring to political parties. I was referring to individuals. Meaning, someone, who is a Democrat, has made a threat towards a president before.

Originally Posted by GiancarloC

Obama has received far many more threats than many prior Presidents including Bush and Clinton. Why is it a big deal? BECAUSE IT MATTERS.

Yes, obviously it matters! My question was why does it matter more for this president than previous presidents? Why does the media make every single threat towards Obama, a headliner? I was asking a question that I feel I answered earlier. Because of his race. As with other presidents, threats come in every single day, but the media never covered all these threats the way they do with this president. I'm just saying that the level of concern is equal for any president. Race should mean nothing, but unfortunately, it does.

Originally Posted by GiancarloC

LOL. About half of independents voted for Obama. But that's a nice try really. The 1980 and 1984 elections were disastrous for this country in the very least. Reagan fucked over this country in more ways people can imagine. I'm non-partisan too... but I know Obama is definitely the right man for the job.

I know. I said nothing about independents voting for Obama, or anyone else. Just said it's nice being an independent and watching people who belong to a party, defend people of that party, for that reason alone.(Actually, it sucks.) I didn't bring up the 80 and 84 elections to defend Reagan. I only mentioned it because it was a time when people came together and voted for someone simply because they liked him, and not because of the party he did, or didn't, represent. Meaning, I don't think something like that will happen again any time soon, due to how divided this country is, and how people will just stick to a party no matter what.

Originally Posted by GiancarloC

That's because of how far right the republican party and certain states have gone. And many people won't vote for someone with an R next to their name because they represent negativity and idiocy.

Yeah, Im sure that's true with some people. But in this day and age, it's more because the guy/gal has a D or a R next to their name.

Responses in red. I hope that worked! lol

Last edited by opinterph; November 25th, 2012 at 09:19 AM.
Reason: fixed attributions and quote tags

I find it comical when some people say Obama decided to be FORGay Marriage because it boost his chances of being re-elected....LOL...Yeah, right....

I honestly believe that Obama felt if he was gonna be in office only 1 term he wanted to be on the Right side of History and wanted his Legacy to show that he stopped the Economy from Bleeding, he gave the orders to Find & Kill Osama, Passed Womens equal Pay Act, Implemented the Deferred Action for Childhood arrivals program that includes a 2yr grace period, Ended the war in Iraq, passed Historical Affordable Health care, Ended DADT, Set up an End-date in Afghanistan, Stopped defending DOMA in the courts, and became the First sitting President to acknowledge his support for Gay Marriage....WOW and wow...

Hate'em or Crticize'em all you want to but All of this would have been a part of his 1-term Legacy even if a few things would have been washed away or watered down by Romney...

Now that we've given him a 2nd-term I can't wait to see what he accomplishes next..The question is can he accomplish even MORE in his 2nd-term or will the window of opportunity close on him too FAST?